Murat SAĞLAM, Hakan TÜRKMEN, Esin PEKMEZ

Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Sosyo-Bilimsel Konular Hakkındaki Düşünceleri

Bu çalışmanın amacı fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının fen-teknoloji-toplum-çevre bağlantısıbağlamında sosyo-bilimsel sorunlar hakkındaki görüşlerini ortaya koymaktır. Bu amaçlatarama modeli kullanılmıştır. Yüz otuz beş fen bilgisi öğretmen adayı uygunluk örnekleminegöre seçilmiş ve 4 tanesi açık uçlu 3 tane de derecelendirilmiş ölçekli soru sorularak elde edilenveriler freakans analizi ile değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak öğretmen adaylarının Sosyobilimsel konular hakkında yeterli bilgi düzeyinde olmadıklarını ortaya konmuştur, lakin bukonuların nasıl öğretilebileceği konusunda ise tam tersine olması gereken niteliklere yaniyöntem ve/ya tekniklerin kullanımına sahiptirler. Ayrıca sosyo-bilimsel konularla ilgili bilgi vegörüşlerinde en etkili olan kaynak üniversitedeki derslerden fizik, kimya, biyoloji dersleriolurken, medyadan sosyal medya ve görsel medya, sosyal hayat açısından ise arkadaşlar ve ailebilgi kaynağı olarak ön plana çıkmaktadır. Sosyo-bilimsel sorunlar örneğin genetikkopyalamalar, nükleer silahlanma, obezit7e vb. bireyler daha ilgisiz kalmaktadır

Pre-Service Science Teachers’ Thoughts about Socio-Scientific Issues

The aim of this study is to find out the views of prospective science teachers about socioscientific issues in the context of science-technology-society-environment. Descriptive surveymodel was used in this study. 135 prospective science teachers were chosen conveniencesampling method. They were asked seven questions, four of them were open ended questions,three of them were graduated scale questions. The data were evaluated by frequency analysis.As a result it was found that the prospective students’ level of knowledge of socio-scientificissues is not adequate, on the other hand it was also found that they were qualified about themethods and/or techniques that they could use to teach socio-scientific issues. Additionally,their best sources of knowledge about socio-scientific issues were stated as the courses (physics,chemistry, biology) that they took in their graduate degree. The others are as follows: media(social and visual), social life (friends, family). The issues that are not unspoken agenda in thesociety such as genetic cloning, nuclear armament, obesity etc., are not the interests of thesample

PDF

___

Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2001). Embedding nature of science instruction in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but ... Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12, 215-233.
Abd-El Khalick, F., ve Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 295-317.
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R.L., ve Lederman, N.G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417–436.
Alaçam, Akşit, C. (2011). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının sosyobilimsel konularla ve bu konuların öğretimiyle ilgili görüşleri. (Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi) Ege Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İzmir.
Albe, V. (2007). Students’ positions and considerations of scientific evidence about a controversial socioscientific issue. Science & Education, 17 (8-9), 805-827.
Albe, V. (2008). When scientific knowledge, daily life experience, epistemological and social considerations intersect: Students’ argumentation in group discussions on a socio- scientific issue. Research in Science Education, 38 (1), 67-90. Bacanak, A. (2002). Fen bilgisi öğretmen adaylarının fen okuryazarlıkları ile fen-teknolojitoplum dersinin uygulanışını değerlendirmeye yönelik bir çalışma. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi) KTÜ, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Trabzon.
Çepni, S., Ayvacı, H. Ş. ve Bacanak, A. (2006). Fen eğitimine yeni bir bakış: Fen-Teknoloji- Toplum. Ankara: Pegem.
Çepni, S., Bacanak, A.ve Küçük, M. (2003). Fen eğitiminin amaçlarında değişen değerler: fen teknoloji toplum. Değerler Eğitimi Dergisi, 1(4), 7-29. Demir, A. ve Pala A. (2007). Genetiği değiştirilmiş organizmalara toplumun bakış açısı. Hayvansal Üretim, 48(1), 33-43.
Forbes, C. T. ve Davis, E. A. (2008). Exploring preservice elementary teachers’ critique and adaptation of science curriculum materials in respect to socioscientific issues. Science & Education, 17, 829-854. Fraenkel, J. R. ve Wallen, N. E. (2003). How to design and evaluate reseach in education. (Fifth Edition) New York: McGraw Hill.
Genel, A. ve Topçu, M. S. (2016). Turkish preservice science teachers’ socioscientific issues- based teaching practices in middle school science classrooms. Research in Science and Technological Education, 34(1), 105-123.
Gray, D.S.ve Bryce, T. (2006). Socio-scientific issues in science education: implications for the professional development of teachers. Cambridge Journal of Education, 36 (2), 171- 192.
Kapucu, S. (2014). Salient beliefs of pre-service primary school teachers underlying an attitude “liking or disliking physics”. Science Education International, 25(4), 437-458.
Kılıç, S., Koçak, N., Türker, T., Gürpınar, H. ve Gülerik, D. (2010). Kız üniversite öğrencilerinin organ bağışı konusundaki tutumları ve bu tutumlarına etki eden faktörler.Gülhane Tıp Dergisi, 52, 36-40. King, P. M. ve Kitchener, K. S. (2004). Reflective judgment: Theory and research on the development of epistemic assumptions through adulthood. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 5-18.
Kolsto, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291-310.
Kolsto, S. D., Bungum, B., Arnesen, E., Isnes, A., Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., Mestad, I., Quale, A., Tonning, A. S. V. ve Ulvık, M. (2006). Science students’ critical examination of scientific information related to SSI. Science Education, 90, 632-655.
Lederman, N.G. (1986). Students' and teachers' understanding of the nature of science: A reassessment. School Science and Mathematics, 86(2), 91-99.
Lederman, N.G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
Lee, H., Abd-El-Khalick, F. ve Choi, K. (2006). Korean science teachers' perceptions of the introduction of socio-scientific issues into the science curriculum. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 6(2), 97-117. Lee, H., ve Witz, G. K. (2009). Science teachers' inspiration for teaching socio- scientific issues: disconnection with reform efforts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(7), 931-960.
Lester, B. T., Ma, L. ,Okhee, L., ve Lambert, J. (2006). Social activism in elementary science education: a science, technology and society approach to teach global warming. International Journal of Science Education, 28(4), 315-339.
MEB (2013). İlköğretim kurumları (ilkokullar ve ortaokullar) fen bilimleri dersi (3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) Öğretim Programı.
Osborne, J., Erduran, S. ve Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 994-1020.
Özden M., Kara, A.ve Tekin, A. (2008) Öğretmen adaylarının fen bilgisi öğretimi dersine ilişkin tutumları. Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(23), 352-377.
Özgün Koca, S.A.ve Şen A.İ. (2006). Orta öğretim öğrencilerinin matematik ve fen derslerine yönelik olumsuz tutumlarının nedenleri. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 23, 137-147
Özkan, S. ve Yılmaz, E. (2009). Hasta yakınlarının organ bağışı ile ilgili bilgi ve tutumları. aile ve toplum eğitim, Kültür ve Araştırma Dergisi, 5(17), 18-29. Pedersen, J. ve Türkmen, H. (2005). Pre-service teachers’ knowledge and perceptions of social issues. STS Today, 17(2), 2-12.
Pedretti, E. (1999). Decision making and sts education: exploring scientific knowledge and social responsibility in schools and science centers through an issue-based approach. Journal of School Science and Mathematics, 99(4), 174-181.
Ratcliffe, M. ve Grace, M. (2003). Science education for citizenship: teaching socio-scientific issues. Berkshire: McGraw-Hill.
Sadler, T.D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socio-scientific issues: a critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 513- 536.
Sadler, T. D. ve Donnelly, L. A. (2006). Socioscientific argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality. International Journal of Science Education, 28(12), 1463- 1488.
Sadler, T. D. ve Klosterman, M.L. (2008). Exploring the sociopolitical dimensions of global warming. Science Activities: Classroom Projects and Curriculum Ideas, 45(4), 9-13. Sadler, T. D. ve Zeidler, D. L. (2009). Scientific Literacy, PISA, and socioscientific discourse assessment for progressive aims of science education. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 46(8), 909-921.
Schwartz, R.S., Lederman, N.G. ve Crawford, B.A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context An explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Teacher Education, 88(4), 610-645. Solomon, J. (1993). Teaching science, technology and society. Open Universy Press.Solomon J. ve Aikenhead G. (1994). STS education: international perspectives on reform, Teachers College Press, New York.
Sorgo, A., Ambrožič-Dolinšek, J., Uşak, M., ve Özel, M. (2011). Knowledge about and acceptance of genetically modified organisms among pre-service teachers: A comparative study of Turkey and Slovenia. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, 14(4), 1-16.
Sürmeli, H. ve Şahin, F. (2010). Üniversite öğrencilerinin genetik mühendisliği ile ilgili biyoetik görüşleri: Genetik testler ve genetik tanı. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7(2), 119-132.
Sürmeli, H., ve Şahin, F. (2012). Preservice teachers’ opinions and ethical perceptions in relation to cloning studies. Çukurova University Faculty of Education Journal, 41(2), 76-86. Strauss, A., ve Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedurs and techniques. Newbury Park, C. A.: Sage.
Şahin, E., ve Yağbasan, R. (2012). Determining which introductory physics topics pre-service physics teachers have difficulty understanding and what accounts for these difficulties. European Journal of Physics, 33(2), 315-325.
Şama, E. (2003). Öğretmen adaylarının çevre sorunlarına yönelik tutumları. G.Ü. Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 23(2), 99-110.
Tal T., ve Kedmi, Y. (2006) Teaching socioscientific issues: classroom culture and students’ performances. Science And Education, 1, 615–644.
Topçu, M. S. (2008). Fen öğretmen adaylarının sosyobilimsel konular hakkındaki kritik düşünme yetenekleri ve bu yetenekleri etkileyen faktörler (Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi). Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Topçu, M.S., Muğaloğlu, Z. E. ve Güven, D. (2014). Fen eğitiminde sosyobilimsel konular: Türkiye örneği. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 14(6), 2327-2348.
Tytler, R. (2001). Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 23(8), 815-832.
Williams, C., Stanisstreet, M., Spall, K., Boyes, E., ve Dickson, D. (2003). Why aren’t secondary students interested in physics? Physics Education, 38(4), 324-329.
Yager, R. E., (2001). Science-Technology-Society and education: A focus on learning and how persons know. In Cutcliffe, S. H., and Mitcham, C. Ed., Visions of STS: Counterpoints in Science, Technology, and Society Studies (81-97). State University of New York Press.Yalvaç, B., Tekkaya C., Çakiroglu J.ve Kahyaoglu E. (2007). Turkish pre-service science teachers' views on science-technology-society issues. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 331-348.
Yetişir, M.I., ve Kaptan, F. (2008). STS from a historical perspective and its reflection on the curricula in Turkey. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 1, 3- 8. Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. (5. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi
Zeidler, D.L., Walker, K.A., Ackett, W.A., ve Simmons, M.L. (2002). Tangled up in views: beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas. Science Education, 83(3), 343-367.